Making race matter

We’ve moved over to the paradox forums. Please come visit us there to discuss:
You can still read the collective wisdom - and lolz - of the community here, but posting is no longer possible.

Home Forums Age of Wonders 3 Discussions Making race matter

Tagged: 

This topic contains 24 replies, has 15 voices, and was last updated by  SpoonyGundam 8 years, 2 months ago.

Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 25 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #77787

    CrazyElf
    Member

    I think that one of the bigger issues with this game is that your starting race doesn’t really matter.

    You can absorb any competing race into your civilization.

    What can be done to make race make a difference? My proposals to make machines and summons vary the way units vary for Warlord was not well received.

    #77800

    vyolin
    Member

    I will just leave this here instead of reiterating my point.
    Making morale matter
    The gist of it is that choice of race does only matter if other race’s units and class units are much tougher to get and/or are not that much better in the field. Since racial units are already pretty diverse your problem gets much better or even disappears if this underlying problem is tackled.
    Feel free to chime in over there, it should have at least some points of worth for you in it.

    #77805

    Sloul
    Member

    My proposals to make machines and summons vary the way units vary for Warlord was not well received.

    Can you clarify this?

    I think this, is hardly solveable. Ofc I have faith in Triumph, but I think it will be one of the last problem to be adressed because it involves many things and it needs serious brainstorm and tests.

    For instance, I think your question involves two other subject:
    – alignement : huge subject
    – racial units: easy subject, but yet, I guess, ressource consuming for Triumph

    If any race at start would have a roster much more different from each other, with unique units for 1st and 2nd tier, then, players might give more time to consider which race to start with.
    Though mid-game, this starting difference might already ”disappear”.
    Then, what might still be in effect would be some kind of alignement tied to race, or diplomacy between races.
    Other than that? Maybe special abilities for your heroes depending what race he is? A starting mount different for each race?

    #77806

    CrazyElf
    Member

    I will just leave this here instead of reiterating my point.<br>
    Making morale matter<br>
    The gist of it is that choice of does only matter if other race’s units and class units are not easier to get and/or better in the field<br>
    Feel free to chime in over there, it should have at least some points of worth for you in it.

    Thinking about this, it should probably be balanced out by having an army of your own race (ex: +50 happiness for your own race)?

    This gives incentives for you to opt for your own race.

    #77808

    CrazyElf
    Member

    Can you clarify this?

    What I proposed earlier was making summons and machines race-specific. Look at the Warlord. Notice that the units in the Warlord are race specific. I was proposing that the same thing be done for machines and summons.

    - alignement : huge subject

    It does raise that issue indeed. Perhaps units should reflect their races alignment?

    #77834

    Races don’t have alignments– factions do. Sometimes, specific units that are dedicated to good or evil will suffer morale penalties if your empire leans strongly the other way, but these tend, in my experience, to be monsters of one kind or another. So having a racial morale penalty based on alignment doesn’t seem to make sense to me.

    The thread linked in the second reply seems to have some good ideas about city race matching leader race– my option would be to dramatically increase the time for absorbing a city relative to the migration options. You could also make it so that migrating to your own race was faster than migrating to any other.

    #77840

    vyolin
    Member

    Thinking about this, it should probably be balanced out by having an army of your own race (ex: +50 happiness for your own race)?

    This gives incentives for you to opt for your own race.

    Exactly. You should find something very close to this in the thread I linked to.

    #77842

    Rev
    Member

    Did you really need to make another thread talking about the same thing as your other thread???

    #77857

    I think someone explained it here (I am not sure if it was one of the devs or something), the reason why they make it that way is to ensure that everything is balanced. I do have to agree that I kind of want the races to matter like let’s say Orcs would be the best warlords and dwarves are the best dreadnoughts. I must say though that I don’t mind the flexibility as it is a bit tiring seeing the usual archetypes in most fantasy games (i.e dwarves are good with machines, elves are mages and orcs are warriors, etc.).

    #77873

    vyolin
    Member

    I think someone explained it here (I am not sure if it was one of the devs or something), the reason why they make it that way is to ensure that everything is balanced. I do have to agree that I kind of want the races to matter like let’s say Orcs would be the best warlords and dwarves are the best dreadnoughts. I must say though that I don’t mind the flexibility as it is a bit tiring seeing the usual archetypes in most fantasy games (i.e dwarves are good with machines, elves are mages and orcs are warriors, etc.).

    I am afraid but I think you are missing the point here. This is not about race and class synergy, this is about racial diversity.

    #77878

    DShark
    Member

    Since people has been asking for t4 racials maybe you can get only t4 racials of the race you choose. these t4 could be only utility ones (not dedicated to combat, low damage output but kinda high hp) that buff only units of its own race (maybe just low tier units).

    #77888

    Morelyn
    Member

    Races don’t have alignments– factions do.

    Well, I know Triumph is tying to make it that way in this game, but I think that’s part of the problem. In Tolkien or in a Dungeons & Dragons Monster Manual, races certainly do have alignments. In HoMM, armies with mixed monster alignments suffered morale penalties.

    My idea would be to have orcs or goblins always start out leaning towards evil and high elves always leaning towards good, with the other three neutral. You should suffer a morale penalty for incorporating the oppositely aligned city in your empire, but it should be able to be overcome over the course of time and with work. If you want to start out in an orc city, you should be able to gradually make it good, but it should START OUT evil.

    Getting rid of alignment is a big part of what makes races bland to me.

    #77890

    Hulahn
    Member

    I have posted a comment in Vyolin’s other post (“Making morale matter”), however, I’ll briefly inquire of everyone here: if race affects terrain preference, which in turn affects troop morale, and therefore affects troop performance, then does not having research-able spells/abilities which allow you to modify & spread terrain provide you opportunities to exploit your race, versus your opponents’, and therefore make your racial selection matter on a larger scale than what is being expressed here?
    Does this point make sense, or is terrain-based troop morale not a high enough level of impact based on what people are looking for? If I have missed something in the mechanics, then pardon my ignorance (or lack of in-game experience), and do respond honestly and without malice, thank you. 🙂

    #77897

    CrazyElf
    Member

    Since people has been asking for t4 racials maybe you can get only t4 racials of the race you choose. these t4 could be only utility ones (not dedicated to combat, low damage output but kinda high hp) that buff only units of its own race (maybe just low tier units).

    I’d actually want them to be dedicated to combat (or have some T4s support, some dedicated to combat).

    It would make the endgame much more interesting. There would be multiple choices for T4 combos.

    #77903

    CrazyElf
    Member

    Does this point make sense, or is terrain-based troop morale not a high enough level of impact based on what people are looking for? If I have missed something in the mechanics, then pardon my ignorance (or lack of in-game experience), and do respond honestly and without malice, thank you. 🙂

    It’s only one variable that’s part of the equation.

    The races each have their unique advantages and benefits. But the issue is that you can always integrate the best of each race into your army without consequence.

    #77974

    Hulahn
    Member

    What about a fixed attribute modifier to all troops of every leader, regardless of the troop’s race, but based always (and solely) upon the race of the leader. For example, the following troop modifiers:

    Orc – +1 melee, -1 range
    Goblin – +1 range, -1 melee
    Dwarf – +1 defense, -1 resistance
    Draconian – +1 melee, -1 resistance
    Human – no modifiers (jack-of-all-trades)
    High Elf – +1 resistance, -1 melee

    That way, it alters your troops in a way that either makes things just a bit more of a challenge, or at least reflects an inclination of each race toward a particular skillset, but not completely game-changing that you couldn’t still choose to be any alignment, class, or specialization, and still succeed; you simply play in consideration of your strengths/weaknesses. It might add another strategy level figuring that your troop facing off against one of theirs of the same type (race & class) might have an edge in the range or hand-to-hand damage department, or could take just a bit more punishment that might tip the scales.

    Plus, there are still a few combinations left for future race additions.

    #78048

    Hulahn
    Member

    –DUPLICATE–

    #78064

    esvath
    Member

    I think there are two racial “aspects” of AoW III that need more emphasis to make race matter:

    1) the race of the leader
    We can emphasis racial aspect of the leader by giving each leader new racial techs, researchable or automatically gained at turn 1:
    1) a) racial techs give bonus to whole empire, like current empire upgrades. For example, High Elves leaders can research Hawkeye Shooter that gives all archer units in his/her empire +1 range strength.
    1) b) racial techs that give bonus to his/her race units, for example, all High Elves leader have (automatically/researchable) High Elven Commander tech, that grants all High Elves units in his/her empire +200 morale.
    1) c) racial techs that benefit his/her race’s city, for example all High Elves leader have Treetop Tower tech, that allows the construction of Treetop Tower in every high elves cities. No Treetop Tower in human/dwarves/other races’ cities.

    Personally, I prefer for option 1) a) and/or 1) b), since the leader is, well, leader of whole nation. His/her racial traits should benefits his/her whole nation, even when the benefits is kind of limited.

    2) the race of the cities
    I think it is important to add racial buildings for each city, to make Goblin cities different than Human cities or Draconian ones. These buildings will be razed automatically when the city’s race is migrated to another race. I have posted a suggestion about this in the suggestion thread.

    #78085

    CrazyElf
    Member

    What about a fixed attribute modifier to all troops of every leader, regardless of the troop’s race, but based always (and solely) upon the race of the leader. For example, the following troop modifiers:

    At the moment, there is already a racial modifier for each race, and in any event the ones you’re proposing are only going to have a modest effect (only 1 unit).

    Plus the existing ones are more widespread, for example goblins are cheaper but less hp.

    #78092

    CrazyElf is correct. For reference (patch 1.09), the current racial bonuses are:

    P: production
    G: gold
    R: research
    D: defense
    S: Strength
    Rs: Ranged Strength
    Sd: spell defense (ankh symbol)
    Hp: Hitpoints
    Wk: weakness
    Pr: Protection
    Attack types: Phy/Physical, Lgt/ Lighning, Blt/Blight, Fi/Fire, Fr/Frost

    HUMAN:
    +5 P in cities
    Mariner (better naval combat for embarked troops)

    HIGH ELF:
    +1 SD
    +1 Phy Rs
    +1 Lgt Rs
    +20% Wk Blt
    +3 R/City
    Forestry

    ORC:
    +5HP
    -1 Sd
    +1 Phy S
    -1 Phy Rs
    Night vision

    GOBLIN:
    -5 hp
    +40% Blt Pr
    -10% Unit cost
    +10% Pop growth
    Cave Crawling, Night Virsion, Wetlands Walking

    DWARF:
    +1 D
    +1 Sd
    +20% Blt Pr
    Unit cost +10%
    Mountaineering, Cave Crawling, Night Vision

    DRACONIAN:
    +20% Fi Pr
    +20% Fr Wk
    +3 Mana/City
    Fast Healing

    I haven’t included terrain hates/likes here. As I understood it, the point of this thread is that, terrain effects on morale aside, there’s very little pointing you to produce units of one race over another based on your starting race.

    #78112

    lief1
    Member

    One method that could work is adding a few race technologies, and adding racial T4s but you can only train the racial T4 of your leaders race it could be unlocked with a late game technology research and require racial unique building to produce.

    #78117

    Zenicetus
    Member

    Why does everyone ignore Heroes in these posts? Wouldn’t your armies feel more like the conquering armies of your Leader if the Heroes were the same race?

    I don’t mind leading armies of conscripts from conquered cities, but it just feels weird to have Heroes leading my armies from other races. This should at least be an option, and I don’t see how it would be game-breaking, or difficult to program on the setup screen.

    #78123

    Rabiator
    Member

    Personally I think races should have an alignment, because that would be a necessary change to make scenarios or random maps less boring. The way it is now you get a peace treaty from every AI “opponent” and this removes any pressure on you. Even if an AI declared war on you it will ask for peace again after some time and that isnt good.

    Making races matter is something that needs to be resolved by the units and having certain tiers of units that can only be built if your alignment corresponds with that of the race of a city is a good idea.

    Currently the units from the class trump everything, but there should be equally powerful units from the races as well to add more spice and choice to the game. There arent any “iconic” creatures to be built either (unless you have captured a special city in a scenario) and that is a shame. I miss those powerful dragons and giants and titans …

    Let’s face it … the Dreadnought units are VERY fancy and interesting, but compare them to the units for Arch Druid or Sorcerer and you will notice that the ones for these other classes are relatively boring in comparison. The Phantasm Warrior for example is a truly boring creature which I would only summon in a dire emergency to save a city (but that isnt really necessary against an AI). The same is true for the animals of the Arch Druid.

    The gist of it is that the whole class skills/spells and the racial units need to be changed somewhat. I also have to say TO HELL WITH BALANCE, because that usually drives game devs to make a game boring/bland by keeping units/spells “comparable”. There is nothing wrong with a tic tac toe system, because you are forced to build more than just one unit type. Adding a powerful racial creature would be a good thing to help with such a system.

    #78165

    razzafazza
    Member

    in all fairness AOW3 is a game with a lot of content so i think they already did a great job on diversity but nevertheless of course i d love to see even more and have to second some suggestions:

    -racial siege units: not just a trebutchet for every race but something individual & unique to that race would be awesome. and if thats not possible then at least slightly differnt visuals for trebutchets (highelf ones being more “polished” vs. orc ones being crude & funcitonal)

    -more fitting visuals for SOME racial class units.

    I know I m not the only one who s not fond how mounted archers look for example. it’s a fitting look for orcs & goblins but they imho look completely out of place in a highelf army. same for warbreeds. pretty much all racial class units look way too similar among the different races anyhow=(

    it doesn’t have to be completely new models with new animations but correct me if I m wrong but shouldn’t it be a fairly minor thing to change little details like helmets or weapons or (bards) instruments to have those units look more fitting with their race ? tiny details like these could add alot to (visual) racial diversity.

    granted I m just talking about racial class units, i.e. of course summons like wisps or eldritch horrors etc. don’t have to be changed for every race.

    -racial research: I d love if some (highend) research projects came from race in addition to sphere/class research projects. one (maybe overpowered, maybe useless – it would of course need balancing) example:

    Goblin race research ( lategame project to not imbalance the early game):
    “Strenght in numbers” (I d prefer a more goblin-fitting name though):

    Every goblin tier 1 unit gains a the “Strenght in numbers” ability: with this ability your units gain INCOMBAT regeneration of X hitpoints per turn. X being the number of other tier 1 units in your army that are still alive on the battlefield. if that is 20 tier 1 units that’s indeed a mighty awesome 20 hp regen ( keep in mind though how fragile goblin tier 1 troops are – regeneration is pointless if your unit gets killed ) – but as the tier 1 troops start dieing that regen drops further and further for the others.

    -1-2 more racial buildings would also be lovely.

    -furthermore I d like mechanics that discourage race-mixing more. I don’t want it elimated – it should be possible to have all 6 races in your empire but that flexibility should come at a bigger cost, i.e. much higher chances for rebellion etc.

    -regarding expansion content i am AGAINST tier 4 racial units. i d rather see more tier 2 / 3 ones. getting more TROOPS instead of single creatures/monsters into battles d be great.

    #78192

    SpoonyGundam
    Member

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>DShark wrote:</div>
    Since people has been asking for t4 racials maybe you can get only t4 racials of the race you choose. these t4 could be only utility ones (not dedicated to combat, low damage output but kinda high hp) that buff only units of its own race (maybe just low tier units).

    I’d actually want them to be dedicated to combat (or have some T4s support, some dedicated to combat).

    It would make the endgame much more interesting. There would be multiple choices for T4 combos.

    I think I’d rather see new T3s first, honestly. The current ones are all just so samey. Three infantry, three cavalry. Their properties are different enough, but there’s not enough variety in their actual roles.

    Give an additional archer/irregular/support T3 to each race, and try not to overlap role combinations with each other. If you’ve got multiple races with Cavalry/Archer T3s, you aren’t much better off than before.

    And yeah, lock any new T3s and potential T4s to your chosen race only, but still allow any race to build the current T3s through absorbing.

Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 25 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.